司法鉴定听证制度若干问题研究

听证制度在国家立法和行政工作中已取得较为完善的构建.近些年来,在鉴定实务中,如知识产权、医疗纠纷、司法精神病鉴定、司法会计鉴定等鉴定领域,也已经试用听证来解决一些难题.学界也对司法鉴定听证进行关注、研究,主要涉及鉴定听证的制度价值、适用范围、启动、听证参与人的确定、主持人的选任、听证程序规则设计等方面,但当下仍存在诸多争议和问题.对司法鉴定听证制度进行研究,论证司法鉴定听证的法律依据、制度价值,在此基础上提出司法鉴定听证在补充收集材料真实性的责任承担主体、启动、时间选择、参与人的确定等问题上的解决路径.     

司法鉴定制度改革的逻辑反思与路径探究

司法制度改革是以消解影响司法公正的体制性因素作为逻辑进路的。然而，这些消极性的体制性因素在司法鉴定制度改革过程中并未因改革而消退，法律所型构的目标不仅没有达到，而改革的成果又被改革中出现的新问题所遮蔽，致使司法鉴定制度的改革陷入了治丝益棼的窘境。因此，有必要对司法鉴定制度改革的原有逻辑进路进行反思，从中寻找出能够保障司法鉴定可靠性和可信性的路径，保障接续而来制度本身的改革以及其他制度改革得以顺利进行。     

司法体制综合配套改革:回顾、反思与完善

党的十九大报告提出深化司法体制综合配套改革。本轮司法体制改革在司法管理体制、司法权运行机制、人权司法保障机制以及司法便民利民方面已取得一定成效。应从构建司法人员选任制度、实现司法权力优化配置、发展多元化纠纷解决机制以及建立科学的司法改革评价体系等方面完善司法体制配套措施。     

Measuring Meritocracy in the Public Sector in Europe: a New National and Sub-National Indicator

Since the late nineteenth century, the presence of an independent and meritocratic bureaucracy has been posited as an advantage for effective bureaucratic behaviour and a means of limiting patrimonial networks and corruption, among other benefits. There is little consensus on how the features of an independent and meritocratic bureaucracy should be measured across countries, however, and broad empirical studies are therefore rare. What is more, the few such studies that exist have advanced measures which are constructed exclusively on expert surveys. Although these have indeed contributed to the knowledge in the field, the data on which they are built come with problems. This paper proposes a set of novel measures that complement existing measures and thus fill important gaps in this burgeoning literature. The measures we present are not based on expert assessments but on perceptions of public sector employees’ and citizens’. We create two measures—that can be combined into one—from a recent survey (2013) of over 85,000 citizens in 24 European countries. One is purely based on the assessments from public sector employees’ and the other is based on perceptions of citizens working outside the public sector. The paper also discusses the survey and explores the external validity of the measures provided here, showing correlations with alternative measures based on expert opinions, as well as variables from the literature that we would expect to correlate highly with a meritocratic bureaucracy.     

司法人道主义的历史进步——晚清司法改革的价值变向

作为对外部挑战与内部情势的司法回应,晚清修律和司法改革运动首先意味着司法理念与司法原则的历史性转变,进而标志着一种区别于传统司法文明价值系统的近代型司法文明价值系统的应运而生,展示了从传统走向现代的司法文明进步成长的历史图景。这场司法变革运动的启动性举措,乃是删除最重之法,推行恤刑庶狱,彰显了司法人道主义的价值取向,从而为编订《大清现行刑律》和《大清新刑律》奠定了重要基础,在近代中国法律与司法发展进程中产生了深远影响。     

行政诉讼司法建议制度的功能衍化

行政诉讼司法建议原本是一项裁判执行措施,但随着最高人民法院司法政策的变化,其发挥的事实功能被大大扩展。实践中,行政诉讼司法建议在规范性文件修改中发挥着功能性审查的作用。从社会变迁的视角观察不难发现,维稳压力、协调和解政策与地方发展型政府的模式变迁,诱发了对于行政诉讼司法建议的制度性需求,从而迫使司法建议成为行政诉讼工具箱中的重要工具。行政诉讼司法建议制度的功能衍化,为法社会学研究提供了一个极具价值的制度样本,亦为行政诉讼法的未来发展提供了背景材料。     

The Role of Supervising Judges in the Granting of Parole in France: A Critical Evaluation

Since World War II, France has sought to decentralize and individualize its correctional system. The major change in the process was the creation of a new judicial role, that of Supervising Judge, who would incorporate both judicial and correctional roles. Until 1972, paroles were granted solely by the Ministry of Justice in Paris. But following legislative reforms in 1970 and 1972, Supervising Judges were given increased responsibilities in these matters. As a result there has been an increase in the total number of paroles awarded since 1972.

The hoped-for reforms met with strong opposition from correctional authorities, who perceived Supervising Judges as usurping their authority. The reforms were also opposed by some trial judges who saw them as interfering with the traditional role of courts, particularly in the sentencing of offenders. The ambiguous nature of the role itself, neither clearly administrative nor clearly judicial, has contributed to the problem in the development of the institution.

A major weakness in the present system is the lack of a strong administrative infrastructure which prevents Supervising Judges from operating effectively. Few judges are assisted by counselors, parole officers, or even clerks, who are a necessary part of carrying out such broad responsibilities. Supervising Judges have been the target of public criticisms for “coddling” criminals. Since they have little independence within the judiciary, their ability to function without government pressure is limited. There is, therefore, a temptation on the part of many to play it “safe” in order not to displease the public and the judicial hierarchy. While the survival of the role itself does not appear in danger, it may be limited by further legislative restriction of its authority.     

Reforming the Criminal Evidence System in China

Since 1997, China has proposed to reform the judicial system. In 2007, China officially set its goal of judicial reform as to “establish a Socialist Judicial System with fairness, efficiency and authority”. Now that the goal of judicial reform has been firmly established, the key question is how to accomplish that goal. One view advocates achieving judicial reform through administrative measures. A different path, which we proposed, is to accomplish the goal of judicial reform through reinforcing the construction of evidence system. Through analyzing the current law and investigating some judicial cases, the study found that the main reason for issues of judicial unfairness and corruption in current China is due to neglect of the construction of evidence system, and the current evidence rules contain too many problems, and the aforementioned problems have become a bottleneck for China's judicial reform and an important reason for China to reconstruct the whole evidence system. Therefore, in the long run, it would be ideal for legislature to promulgate a unified code of evidence law, but it is an extremely difficult task to coordinate the relationship between evidence law and three major procedural laws. In the short term, the most feasible compromise is to have the Supreme People's Court promulgate People's Court provisions on Evidence. After repeated test through the trials, we believe that such a unified People's Court provisions on Evidence will dramatically improve the evidence system and promote judicial fairness and the reform of legal education in China.     

The establishment of the Judicial Appointments Commission in Malaysia to improve the constitutional method of appointing the judges of the superior courts: a critical study

The Judicial Appointments Commission was established in Malaysia in 2009 to ensure unbiased selection of judicial candidates for the consideration of the Prime Minister, who has the final say regarding the appointment of judges to the superior courts. But the provisions concerning Prime Minister’s power to appoint the majority of the members of the Commission and his unfettered power of removing four of the five appointed members without assigning any reason, have calculatedly been devised for ensuring the selection of judicial candidates having right political patronage in accordance with the covert wishes of the Prime Minister. Furthermore, the Prime Minister’s power of rejecting the Commission’s recommendations of multiple candidates renders the undertaking of a lengthy process of selection unproductive and useless. Thus the Judicial Appointments Commission has become a superfluous body with an ineffective modus operandi to attain the stipulated objectives of improving and complementing the constitutional method of appointing judges to the superior courts. Since the Federal Constitution of Malaysia has not empowered the Parliament to enact a law providing for the establishment of a Judicial Appointments Commission, it also appears that the Judicial Appointments Commission Act 2009 is an invalid piece of legislation.     

历史与逻辑：司法审查的制度化机理

司法审查的理念和制度要素发轫于立法机关制定的法律要服从更高的法律以及权力要受到法律制约的历史性观念。这种制约观念经过漫长的历史演化成为一种意识形态并获得了法治理念的形式，其后与一定的社会政治条件相互作用，并通过制度要素的整合构成人类法治文明的制度基石。司法审查的制度化要素主要有：理性的司法主体是司法审查制度的主体要素；审查程序的司法化是司法审查的程序制度要素；各种形式的高级法是司法审查及其权能的依据；通过司法解释审查行政行为和立法行为的合宪性，是司法审查的内容要素；司法审查的国际化和全球化导致它的价值理念和制度安排突破民族国家的界限，成为人类法治文明生长的共同趋势和必然选择。我国建构司法审查制度要结合司法审查的司法性和政治性特质，形成宪法法院和普通法院相结合的审查制度框架。     

刑事证据审查体系的层阶化再造——以规范要素的系统性整合为基点

精密化司法下,趋于理想的认知目标不仅使得认知重心长期在前,同时还阻绝了全新认知场域形成的必要环境,由此便增加了错案发生的几率。在"以审判为中心"的顶层设计理念提出后,开辟新的认知场域成为可能,但对现有规范加以审视后发现,其非但未能以一种合理的理论编排使之串联成一套以实践为面向的证据审查体系,反而存在"误导"倾向。在经由实践至规范再到理论的反思与检审后,能够清楚地察知,实践在对规范的演绎中发生了某些根本性的背离,并因其间所产生的不当联结而加剧了要素自身的"负外部性"。究其根本,是构成证据审查基本理论框架的内容、对象及手段项下均未被嵌入适格的规范要素。因此,科学、有序且以实践为面向的证据审查规范体系便须在要素理论予以悉数廓清的前提下实施再造。     

Social Justice Beliefs Regarding Old-Age Provisions in Germany: A Latent Profile Analysis

Examining personal beliefs about social justice in the way a society provides financial security in old age may reveal potential conflicts about the distribution of wealth. Individuals differ with regard to how they believe old-age provisions should be distributed (e.g., based on principles of merit or self-reliance), and individuals often endorse more than one belief at the same time. Using latent profile analysis and data from the 2014 German Ageing Survey we identify five separate profiles of social justice beliefs among older adults (40–85 years) in Germany. Belief profiles were based on the extent to which people simultaneously endorse and/or reject meritocratic, redistributive, self-reliant, and fatalistic ideas regarding old-age provisions. Almost 20% of the sample demonstrated a belief system in line with the German meritocratic system. Roughly three-fifth did not show strong preferences for a specific social justice principle. However, we identified two belief profiles representing 22.4% of the sample which may reflect dissent from the current system. Sociodemographic characteristics, political identification, and indicators of social disadvantage (e.g., lower income, fears of decline in social status, and feelings of social exclusion) were differentially associated with the five belief profiles. Overall, the results showed that in particular people of lower socioeconomic status were critical with respect to the principles of the German pension system raising questions regarding the demand of political interventions.     

中国内地与澳门行政诉讼若干制度之比较

作为沿袭葡萄牙、并深受法国行政审判制度影响的澳门行政法,它的若干制度与经验对内地的行政诉讼制度可以有所借鉴和启示。因此,比较内地与澳门行政诉讼制度中的若干因素,包含受案范围、当事人资格以及诉讼客体变更,我们认为,促进行政诉讼的类型化发展并加快行政诉讼配套制度的建立,特别是行政程序法的制定,这应当成为未来完善内地行政诉讼法的重要内容。     

四级两审制的发生和演化

司法体制改革的一个重要举措是设立最高人民法院巡回法庭,这一改革举措可能意味着我国法院层级或审级变化的新动向.从建国以来的历史经验看,法院层级和审级变化并非彼此孤立,且都从属于国家政治形态设计.1954年中共中央取消大区分院,促动了法院审级由三审制改为两审制.两审制带来的法院功能和案负变化,导致中级人民法院层级的设立.为了保障四级两审制平滑运作,民事调解制度扩大,基层法院派出法庭普遍设立.这一法院层级和审级制度的设立,契合了扩大省级地方权力的政治目标.1983年以来“地改市”运动、民事调解制度的萎缩以及撤销部分派出法庭,使得四级两审制的基础发生松动,法院层级和审级方面的新变化由此产生.     

从独立到权威——对司法独立的一种反思

学界对于司法独立的急论似乎已经平息,普遍认为它是成就法治中国的基础条件,甚至把对司法独立的追求视为中国司法改革的根本性问题,这种对司法独立过于迷信的思潮严重压缩了对司法独立理性思考的空间,使得人们往往忽视司法权威较之于司法独立更为重要的地位.因此,很有必要在检讨司法独立的基础上引起大家对司法权威的关注.     

我国司法信息公开制度的重构、检讨与展望

司法信息公开是言论自由与新闻自由所衍生的知情权的嬗变，而知情权的充分行使，又将表达阪、参与权、监督权置于其延展线上。尽管司法信息公开已经被国际社会所认可，但在我国却与司法公开之间薛在误读与曲解。以各国司法信息公开经验为视角，司法行政信息公开、司法程序信息公开、法官信息公开是司法信息公开制度架构中的“三驾马车”。而“三驾马车”并驾齐驱才是制度的应然选择。但是，当前我国司去信息公开制度的运行仍然困难重重，尽力而为，量力而行地完善我国司法信息公开制度是我国司法权力运阡的必然进程。     

The Impact of Training and Language Competence on Judicial Application of EU Law in Hungary

The aim of this research is to identify the role that training in EU law and in a foreign language play in the use of EU law by Hungarian judges in domestic proceedings. Judges in the new Member States face the problems of no or inadequate official EU translations of relevant EU law or case‐law. The need to compare the meaning of other language versions therefore comes into play in order that the judges comply with the requirements of Union loyalty in the Treaty on European Union: Hungarian judges are shown to exhibit certain creative responses to these challenges. The approach to the research is based on an examination of the institutional framework for judicial training, a selection of pertinent case‐law of the Hungarian courts as well as interviews with a number of judges involved in the application of EU law in their courts.     

组织视角下的民事诉讼发回重审制度

民诉法学界和实务界有关二审程序中的发回重审存在较大争议,该制度成为本次民诉法修改的重要议题之一。为了形成共识,对这一问题从法解释论的角度进行阐释解说尤为必要。为了限制发回重审裁量权的滥用,我国司法实践中采用程序细化与加强对审判的组织管理并行的策略。不过这种"程序"与"组织"的交织并不能真正抑制裁量权滥用,反而因剥夺当事人的程序参与权而损害审判的公信力。为调整二者的相互关系,应在审判管理的组织背景下保障审判程序的自主性,恢复当事人在程序运作中的结构性位置。     

澳大利亚专家证据可采性规则研究

在科学技术突飞猛进的时代,随着社会分工的细化和专业化程度的提高,专家证据在诉讼中的作用越来越大。澳大利亚的专家证人制度虽起源于英国,但经过独立后几十年的发展,颇具特色,尤其是在专家证据的可采性方面,已形成了一整套相当具体、完备的规则,如专门知识规则、专家性规则、普通知识规则、基本规则和终局性问题规则等。为了克服专家证据带有偏向性和专家证人被滥用的弊端,澳大利亚在当前的司法改革中提出了不少相应的对策,这为我国亟待改革的司法鉴定制度提供了一些有益的借鉴。     

High‐End Demand: The Legal Profession as a Source of Judicial Selection Reform in Urban China

Most studies of comparative judicial politics suggest that judicial autonomy emerges from democratic competition, but despite its authoritarian political system, China has introduced reforms that increase merit‐based competition, transparency, and modest professional autonomy in local courts. Variations in judicial selection procedures across urban China reflect differences in local markets for professional legal services: when mid‐ranking judges can easily find lucrative local employment as lawyers, court leaders strategically reform appointment and promotion mechanisms to retain these young, but experienced, judges. These findings are based on nearly fifteen months of in‐country fieldwork, conducted between 2012 and 2014, including forty‐nine interviews with judges across three different cities: Shanghai, Shenzhen, and Chengdu. Employing the subnational comparative method, this article not only builds theory regarding the legal profession's role in authoritarian states, but also offers new empirical detail regarding the selection, performance evaluation, and behavior of judges in urban China.